|
Post by carter on Feb 17, 2011 15:45:11 GMT -8
Are we still failing to realize the mega-potential of 7th street/Metro Center? Open up two portals on 6th street (I heard the knockout panels are there) and the problem is solved for the lost 5th street station. Also, there will be a station at Bunker Hill, so I don't know why we keep crying over spilt milk. 7th street will be your new major centrally located station in LA. 16th and 26th is a distance of 1 - 1.5 miles. Both stations are justified like La Brea and Normandie on the Purple Line. Circa 2025, arriving at Metro/7th station via the Purple Line from Westwood: "Now entering Metro/7th Station. Transfer to Metro Rail north to Pasadena, south to Long Beach, west to Santa Monica, and east to East Los Anegeles. Transfer to Red Line to North Hollywood." I think we're going to need a bigger boat.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Feb 17, 2011 16:53:19 GMT -8
I would characterize 7th/Metro Center as currently served by 2 branches: Blue and Red (the Purple Line is really just a stub for now.)
Expo will make it 3 branches. The connector will make it 5. And the fully-realized Purple Line will be 6.
So yes, 7th/Metro has not even begun to see its potential. By the end of the decade, it will be a very busy station, possibly the busiest in the system. Metro needs to plan for that now.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Mar 30, 2011 8:05:37 GMT -8
Looks like somebody had the time to put up a nicely designed website advocating for.................Santa Monica boulevard at Century City!?!?!? Check this out and feel free to comment directly: centurycitysubway.org/
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Mar 30, 2011 9:07:33 GMT -8
The BHUSD just can't seem to wait to blow money away to stop this thing.
If they are willing to go to this level (waste what precious dollars they have in their budget for fighting a subway station that will do them no harm), what else will they be willing to do??
I'm not ready to throw in the towel yet, but the possibility of Santa Monica Blvd. station over Constellation is becoming more and more likely...
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Mar 30, 2011 10:03:14 GMT -8
The BHUSD just can't seem to wait to blow money away to stop this thing. If they are willing to go to this level (waste what precious dollars they have in their budget for fighting a subway station that will do them no harm), what else will they be willing to do?? I'm not ready to throw in the towel yet, but the possibility of Santa Monica Blvd. station over Constellation is becoming more and more likely... Beverly Hills is mobilized, there's no doubt about it. They have money, lawyers, lobbyists, a website and a mobilized citizenry. But ultimately, the decision of where to put the station will be made by the Metro Board. Members of the Metro Board are supposed to represent the interests of the entire county. When it comes time to vote, they will each have to weigh (1) the differential benefit of locating the station on Constellation instead of SMBlvd, against (2) the risk of legal action from Beverly Hills City and school district against Metro, and (3) the political risk to themselves personally, if any. I think it's way to early to call. NFSR was also mobilized, with lots of money, a website, etc. That group is now just a footnote in the history of Expo. But of course the City of Beverly Hills is much bigger and more powerful than a few local NIMBY caterwaulers in Cheviot Hills.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Mar 30, 2011 14:41:50 GMT -8
Looks like somebody had the time to put up a nicely designed website advocating for.................Santa Monica boulevard at Century City!?!?!? Check this out and feel free to comment directly: centurycitysubway.org/I think I just found the waste in the education budget. (I'm sure they found a loophole, like somebody's rich parents donated the funds, or maybe it was done as a class project, rather than stealing from the general fund. It does make one wonder though.... ) Also, I like how they describe both Constellation and Avenue of the Stars as "dead end streets." That may be a concern for other stations, but that's completely irrelevant to a destination station.
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on Mar 30, 2011 15:48:12 GMT -8
Also, I like how they describe both Constellation and Avenue of the Stars as "dead end streets." That may be a concern for other stations, but that's completely irrelevant to a destination station. That's ridiculous! Avenue of the Stars is almost 1 mile long and is a huge, wide boulevard. It hits a golf course at both the north and south ends, but to the south traffic can continue on Motor. You might as well call Santa Monica Blvd a "dead-end street" because it is "only" 14 miles long, "dead ending" at the ocean on the west, and at Sunset Blvd on the east. The only way I would support the Santa Monica station is if the golf course is allowed to redevelop as "Century City North." But I'm not sure Beverly Hills wants that.
|
|
|
Post by matthewb on Mar 30, 2011 17:26:10 GMT -8
What a piece of garbage. I think their students are learning all the wrong lessons.
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Mar 30, 2011 18:31:48 GMT -8
That's ridiculous! Avenue of the Stars is almost 1 mile long and is a huge, wide boulevard. It hits a golf course at both the north and south ends, but to the south traffic can continue on Motor. You might as well call Santa Monica Blvd a "dead-end street" because it is "only" 14 miles long, "dead ending" at the ocean on the west, and at Sunset Blvd on the east. The only way I would support the Santa Monica station is if the golf course is allowed to redevelop as "Century City North." But I'm not sure Beverly Hills wants that. Your preaching to the choir here. Comment on their website or their Facebook page. You'll notice how rehearsed this "non-profit organization"'s responses are.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Wentzel on Apr 1, 2011 10:34:00 GMT -8
The Los Angeles Country Club isn't in Beverly Hills City Limit that I can see.
If it is in the Los Angeles City Limit, developers could build a "Century City North" and pour lots of extra traffic on the entitlement-filled streets of Beverly Hills.
In fact, fear over the affects of "inevitable" development of "Century City North" if the station is on Santa Monica Blvd instead of Constellation could be used if so inclined to pit some Beverly Hills residents against those NIMBYs who are irrationally afraid of the subway running under the school.
Not that I think in these "real politik" terms.
|
|
|
Post by jdrcrasher on Apr 1, 2011 17:16:32 GMT -8
Seriously guys, what are you waiting for? Hammer them!
|
|
|
Post by jdrcrasher on Apr 21, 2011 16:14:16 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on May 10, 2011 15:06:25 GMT -8
Per Streetsblog and other sources, the Beverly Hills Unified School District has filed a writ of mandate in Superior Court to force Metro to provide records that the school district alleges it has legally requested and not received. The list of documents is fairly long. Of the 32 documents requested, Metro has provided two completely and four partially. Per Metro: Other documents which may respond to your request are withheld under Government Code Sections 6254(a), (h), (k) and 6255(a). The relevant California Government Code sections can be found here.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 10, 2011 15:29:58 GMT -8
Per Streetsblog and other sources, the Beverly Hills Unified School District has filed a writ of mandate in Superior Court to force Metro to provide records that the school district alleges it has legally requested and not received. The list of documents is fairly long. Of the 32 documents requested, Metro has provided two completely and four partially. Per Metro: Other documents which may respond to your request are withheld under Government Code Sections 6254(a), (h), (k) and 6255(a). The relevant California Government Code sections can be found here. This one is BS No. 131883. Type in the case no. BS131883 to access the court filings at the LA Superior Court's Web site. The difference between NFSR and BHUSD is that BHUSD has virtually unlimited resources to file as many BSs as possible. This one is only a warning BS by them. LOL
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on May 12, 2011 6:24:50 GMT -8
Wow, check this story out from the LA Times today: www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-0512-bevhills-schools-20110512,0,5353207.story The Beverly Hills School district tried raising $1 million from private donations in a single week to help out with their budget problems. The first thing I thought was: "I wonder how much they are wasting fighting the subway"? Sure enough, the article gets to that topic, and then comes the really interesting part: The school board majority also identified about $245,000 that it added to next year's budget. The funds had originally been earmarked to oppose potential subway tunneling under Beverly Hills High School. Instead, that cost will be shifted to the separate, school-construction bond fund. Two legal opinions supported the maneuver because subway tunneling would affect the district's plan to strengthen the building foundations and seismic safety at the high school, Korbatov said.So, the "school-construction bond fund" money is being used for legal challenges to the subway??? I guess I never completely thought through where a school district would get funds for a lawsuit against the MTA. You have NFSR which used private collected funds from NIMBY's to fight the Expo line. Thats fine, anyone can cork off as much money as they like to satisfy their version of NIMBY heaven. But when public funds (i.e. my money) is being used for a legal challenge against a project that is also using public funds (i.e. my money) then who is looking out for the best interests of the taxpayer? Can someone explain how the BHSD can decide to use public funds to fight the MTA? I just don't get it. If LAX decided to move the North runway 50 feet further North, could the BHSD litigate that based on the idea that having the planes 50 feet closer to the schools (which are miles away in any case, but you get the idea) poses an unacceptable additional rick to their student body? And then at the end we see that they were also doing some PR and lobbying with some spare change: "Officials also spent about $150,000 last year for a public relations and lobbying campaign to advocate for an alternate subway route. That amount will not be charged to the bond fund."Am I also paying for the BHSD to lobby against a project that is in the transit riding publics best interest, and of which there is no evidence that the project will affect the school in any way, either during construction or operation? RT
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on May 12, 2011 10:07:05 GMT -8
This is a clear example of School Board member abusing their official position to advance their personal agenda. BHSD is going to end up spending tens of millions of dollars and get nothing in return.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on May 12, 2011 10:18:26 GMT -8
I saw that last week, it's crazy. The BHEF is trying to raise money to save teachers, counselors and janitors, even while the district itself promises to fritter away millions on fighting the subway.
I'd be interested to see a student movement come out of this, opposing the school board's anti-subway stance, on the grounds that it is wasting money that could be going toward education.
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 12, 2011 10:35:40 GMT -8
They are on a learning curve like all the NIMBYs. It was a stunning experience last night to see that there were no NIMBYs at the Cheviot Hills meeting. Beverly Hills NIMBYs will eventually go away as well and there is no reason to worry about them.
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on May 12, 2011 10:47:51 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on May 12, 2011 10:57:32 GMT -8
Keep in mind that, according to the environmental law, Metro could build anything they want as long as they comply with the law, meaning that they don't need to build what a certain group wants or they don't need to build the best possible alternative out of given alternatives.
Therefore, these lawsuits are moot. Even if the judge finds out that there was something in the EIR/S that didn't comply with the law, all Metro has to do is to redo that part of the study and then they can go ahead and tunnel under Beverly Hills High.
In other words the judge cannot dictate Metro what to build or what no to build. He also cannot permanently stop the project. NIMBYs are on a learning curve as I said and they will soon find out that their efforts are in vain.
Legal cases won't make a difference on building transit. The only thing that can make a difference is if the NIMBYs find political support, which, unlike the lawsuit, would obviously dictate what to build and what not to build. So far they have no political support.
|
|
|
Post by Alexis Kasperavičius on Jun 24, 2011 6:45:30 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Jun 24, 2011 14:47:45 GMT -8
I agree with the editorial, but the golf course issue is a red herring.
The east end of Chinatown station was positively dreadful until they put Homegirl Cafe nearby and even at Union Station, if you walk out the East Portal and head out beyond the bus loop to Vignes, you end up at an off-ramp, a Denny's and some sort of giant police parking lot. Perefctly useful to the LAPD, I'm sure but not much to look at.
It's obviously the SOUTH side of Santa Monica which would be worth the station, although Constellation would be better.
|
|
|
Post by Justin Walker on Jun 24, 2011 15:50:54 GMT -8
I agree with the editorial, but the golf course issue is a red herring. The point is you want to position the station so you have or will have dense development all around the station. Half as many destinations fall within a convenient walking distance catchment area for a Santa Monica station as do for a Constellation station. Side note: I attended the Century City Station Area Advisory Group meeting earlier this week. The Century City stakeholders saw no point in discussing the Santa Monica station location and especially in discussing the Century Park East station location. The members were extremely frustrated that Metro claimed to be seeking their input yet were still presenting the two "worthless" Santa Monica Blvd station options.
|
|
|
Post by jdrcrasher on Jun 24, 2011 16:47:20 GMT -8
The point is you want to position the station so you have or will have dense development all around the station. Half as many destinations fall within a convenient walking distance catchment area for a Santa Monica station as do for a Constellation station. Side note: I attended the Century City Station Area Advisory Group meeting earlier this week. The Century City stakeholders saw no point in discussing the Santa Monica station location and especially in discussing the Century Park East station location. The members were extremely frustrated that Metro claimed to be seeking their input yet were still presenting the two "worthless" Santa Monica Blvd station options. Why would Metro possibly even consider the Santa Monica Blvd options any further? It's quite obvious that Constellation Blvd is the better choice, and the longer Metro keeps all three options open, the more time they give the BHHS NIMBYs to mobilize, start a coalition, and really start creating problems, like lawsuits.
|
|
|
Post by matthewb on Jun 25, 2011 3:05:30 GMT -8
Why would Metro possibly even consider the Santa Monica Blvd options any further? It's quite obvious that Constellation Blvd is the better choice, and the longer Metro keeps all three options open, the more time they give the BHHS NIMBYs to mobilize, start a coalition, and really start creating problems, like lawsuits. The point of studying the options is to have a defense in case of a lawsuit. Metro's lawyers will be able to say that they studied the crazy idea and it did not pencil out.
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Jul 6, 2011 13:53:39 GMT -8
Some pretty huge news from the Feds on the subway front. Looks like the DOT is loaning us $640 million to be used now: thesource.metro.net/2011/07/06/westside-subway-extension-receives-640-million-federal-loan/I suggest cashing the check before the banks close today, not investing the money in Greek or Portuguese bonds, perhaps not even US Bonds... This has me wondering if they can actually start construction in 2013, even if all money sources haven't yet been identified to built it in 10 years like the 10/30 plan hopes to do. You certainly wouldn't want to start the $5.3 billion project with that $640 million plus the Measure R money of $4.07 billion that will trickle in over 30 years, only to find out that you have to stop construction when the initial $640 million runs out? Not sure how that works... Maybe Metro will put out a press release in a few days indicating what the plan will be. RT
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Jul 6, 2011 14:55:54 GMT -8
Looks like the money will go towards finalizing the EIR as well as pay for the inevitable legal costs.
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Jul 6, 2011 15:41:54 GMT -8
Some pretty huge news from the Feds on the subway front. Looks like the DOT is loaning us $640 million to be used now: thesource.metro.net/2011/07/06/westside-subway-extension-receives-640-million-federal-loan/I suggest cashing the check before the banks close today, not investing the money in Greek or Portuguese bonds, perhaps not even US Bonds... This has me wondering if they can actually start construction in 2013, even if all money sources haven't yet been identified to built it in 10 years like the 10/30 plan hopes to do. You certainly wouldn't want to start the $5.3 billion project with that $640 million plus the Measure R money of $4.07 billion that will trickle in over 30 years, only to find out that you have to stop construction when the initial $640 million runs out? Not sure how that works... Maybe Metro will put out a press release in a few days indicating what the plan will be. RT They are going to start in 2013 no matter what barring any unforeseen major problem (i.e. lawsuit). The question is whether they can start work on the entire project or just the first phase and that depends on whether New Starts matching funds will be made available (some Republicans in Congress are currently trying to gut the program) and also whether America Fast Forward will be in place or not. They will have to start negotiating a contract in about 9 months give or take a few months, so if AFF is not in place by then, they probably won't be able to plan the project all at once and would have to build in phases. I imagine this $640M loan will help and may allow them to get that first phase to La Cienega instead of Fairfax if AFF falls apart, but that is just a complete guess on my part
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Jul 12, 2011 12:09:06 GMT -8
Now, a new breed of Beverly Hills NIMBYs are trying to have the Beverly Hills Station eliminated.Beverly Hills Merchants Launch Class War Over Westside SubwayMonday, July 11, 2011, by Neal BrovermanIf you thought folks in greater LA were beyond the xenophobic fear that public transit will ruin the tonier areas of the metropolis by providing access for the poor, unwashed masses, you'd be wrong. According to the Los Angeles Business Journal (subscription required), Rodeo Drive-area merchants are organizing to fight the proposed stop near Wilshire and Beverly Drive--last month, 20 merchants gathered at Spago to discuss their anti-station strategy. Aside from worries over construction impacts, Paris Nourafshan, an owner of an office tower at 9454 Wilshire, provided the following rationale for opposition: "The people who shop Rodeo Drive now don't come in by transit bus, so I don't think someone who shops on Rodeo Drive is going to take the subway. The subway riders are not potential shoppers. They cannot afford the kind of products retailers in the Golden Triangle sell." It's limousines--and possibly their own cars--that get the richies to Rodeo Drive, the merchants say. Another local merchant, Douglas Chrismas, owner and director of Ace Gallery on Wilshire near Canon Drive, has a valid reason for concern over the subway--his business may have to be bought out to make way for the Golden Triangle station. But he had this to say, "The construction will drive away business and we're concerned that once the subway opens, we will lose our high-end clientele permanently as businesses start catering to the subway passengers." Chrismas said he fears not only that Harry Winston and Gucci will take their business elsewhere (where exactly is not stated--Palms, maybe? The Beverly Center would probably be happy to have them too.), but also the crime that will happen once the stop opens. Nourafshan worries too--he says he often has to clean up detritus from the local bus bench: "That's just from a single bus stop. I shudder to think what would happen with a subway station here – a station, by the way, that would not have any restrooms." John Mirisch, the Beverly Hills councilman fighting hard against the Century City station at Constellation and Avenue of the Stars, actually disagrees with the merchants and thinks it'll be a good when the stores' hourly workers can take the train to work. "One of the biggest problems we have in the Golden Triangle is parking, with many spaces being taken by employees," Mirisch told the Journal. "If just a small portion of the employees could be enticed to take the subway, we could free up many more spaces for shoppers and that would boost business, not hurt it." The Journal notes that this class talk was prevalent when a Westside subway extension was floated in the 1980s, and that even back then, people pointed at Beverly Hills naysayers and called them elitists. Beverly Hills might need a new publicist if these stories keep breaking. · Subway to the Sea? Don't Stop at Rodeo Drive [LABJ; subscription only] · $640M Loan for Westside Subway, Work Could Start Next Year [Curbed LA]
|
|
|
Post by rayinla on Jul 12, 2011 12:51:31 GMT -8
Were it not for the additional delays for new studies/meetings and the $$ it would involve to change things mid-stream, I think Metro should call the Beverly Hills NIMBYs' bluff and just shove the whole alignment down to Olympic after Fairfax (stations at La Cienega/Olympic and Beverly/Olympic).
The "Platinum Triangle" could avoid the horrors of the great unwashed AND the Century City station could be approached from the south (with a north/south alignment on Avenue of the Stars) avoiding their precious BH High School. (As an added benefit the tunnel would be perfectly aligned to head north under the golf course to continue to Westwood.)
Then again, BH would then bitch that they are getting "sub-par" station locations (though it might provide a nice boost to Beverly Drive between Wilshire and Pico.)
|
|